Across the country, states are moving to education systems that are more student centered, equitable, and competency based. They are doing so because they understand that the legacy model for educating our young people is not working. Although graduation rates have increased, other markers of progress have not. Standardized test scores remain relatively flat. Achievement and opportunity gaps persist despite decades of increased funding and abundant strategies to reduce them. Chronic absenteeism is near an all-time high. The reality is that too many students do not find school to be interesting, engaging, or relevant for their futures. This is particularly true for youth of color and other marginalized student populations. Rather than continuing to tinker around the edges, we can advance real change! Here’s how.
Educators face growing pressure to utilize data for informed decision-making, yet the research supporting this movement remains underdeveloped. A recent Educational Administration Quarterly article delves into organizational factors influencing data use, drawing from four California school systems. Across traditional districts and charter management organizations (CMOs), state and federal accountability systems heavily shape data use. These systems prioritize data from state assessments and benchmark exams, crucial for program improvement and attracting families in charter schools. Organizational conditions, like decision-making structures, financial resources, and regulatory environments, impact resource allocation for data use. While financial constraints universally limit efforts, CMOs’ decentralized structures enable investments in human capital and technology. These findings highlight tensions arising from diverse accountability demands and propose revisiting metrics underpinning success. They also suggest avenues for sharing best practices, such as districts aiding teacher support while CMOs demonstrate advanced data management systems. Policymakers can leverage these insights to navigate accountability complexities and foster cross-system learning.
Researchers investigate the efficacy of California's technical assistance response to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requirements, specifically focusing on District Assistance and Intervention Teams (DAITs) in low-performing districts. A new study spans three years and examines the impact on student achievement in math and English language arts (ELA) for Program Improvement Year 3 (PI3) districts, separating them into DAIT and non-DAIT groups. The findings reveal a statistically significant positive impact of DAITs on math achievement, with suggestive evidence of improvements in ELA scores. Additionally, DAITs contribute to reducing achievement gaps among different student groups. While the study cannot pinpoint the specific actions of DAITs leading to improved outcomes, it highlights their potential role in enhancing focus on data-guided instruction, shaping district culture with high expectations, and increasing within-district accountability. Results suggest that intensive technical assistance interventions, such as DAITs, could be a cost-effective means of improving student achievement in low-performing schools and districts, emphasizing the importance of exploring technical assistance provisions in accountability policies for broader applications.
Advancing Towards a Student-Centered Approach to Education
Across the country, states are moving to education systems that are more student centered, equitable, and competency based. They are doing so because they understand that the legacy model for educating our young people is not working. Although graduation rates have increased, other markers of progress have not. Standardized test scores remain relatively flat. Achievement and opportunity gaps persist despite decades of increased funding and abundant strategies to reduce them. Chronic absenteeism is near an all-time high. The reality is that too many students do not find school to be interesting, engaging, or relevant for their futures. This is particularly true for youth of color and other marginalized student populations. Rather than continuing to tinker around the edges, we can advance real change! Here’s how.
Designing School Systems to Encourage Data Use and Instructional Improvement
Educators face growing pressure to utilize data for informed decision-making, yet the research supporting this movement remains underdeveloped. A recent Educational Administration Quarterly article delves into organizational factors influencing data use, drawing from four California school systems. Across traditional districts and charter management organizations (CMOs), state and federal accountability systems heavily shape data use. These systems prioritize data from state assessments and benchmark exams, crucial for program improvement and attracting families in charter schools. Organizational conditions, like decision-making structures, financial resources, and regulatory environments, impact resource allocation for data use. While financial constraints universally limit efforts, CMOs’ decentralized structures enable investments in human capital and technology. These findings highlight tensions arising from diverse accountability demands and propose revisiting metrics underpinning success. They also suggest avenues for sharing best practices, such as districts aiding teacher support while CMOs demonstrate advanced data management systems. Policymakers can leverage these insights to navigate accountability complexities and foster cross-system learning.
Technical Assistance Can Play a Key Role for Poorly-Performing Schools
Researchers investigate the efficacy of California's technical assistance response to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requirements, specifically focusing on District Assistance and Intervention Teams (DAITs) in low-performing districts. A new study spans three years and examines the impact on student achievement in math and English language arts (ELA) for Program Improvement Year 3 (PI3) districts, separating them into DAIT and non-DAIT groups. The findings reveal a statistically significant positive impact of DAITs on math achievement, with suggestive evidence of improvements in ELA scores. Additionally, DAITs contribute to reducing achievement gaps among different student groups. While the study cannot pinpoint the specific actions of DAITs leading to improved outcomes, it highlights their potential role in enhancing focus on data-guided instruction, shaping district culture with high expectations, and increasing within-district accountability. Results suggest that intensive technical assistance interventions, such as DAITs, could be a cost-effective means of improving student achievement in low-performing schools and districts, emphasizing the importance of exploring technical assistance provisions in accountability policies for broader applications.